lol @ the reviews. "Other tests that employ advanced hacker techniques have detected a few esoteric vulnerabilities in the Norton firewall" from the Norton review - what tests and what vulnerabilities? I bet they just thought something cool-sounding up and typed it in for the "review".

Haha it wouldn't suprise me. I just can't believe the front of Comodo, they kicked off big time over avc, accusing them of giving the best results to the highest payer, and then they go and pay a sleezy site like this, I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh.

Since everyone always asks for it where is the proof Comodo paid them off?

Everyone on this forum makes baseless claims and never provides proof, but as soon as something they believe in is questioned without proof what ever was questioned is false.

Click to expand...

Well you've got to remember that Comodo always asked for third party reviews of tests; therefore, if Comodo is consistent, Comodo should also ask for a third party review of that top ten test as well. To me, it seems to be that Comodo always makes a fuss about the result of a test when the test company does not yield to their demands. Don't you think?

Feel free to read the link explaining what the site is. An actual, reputable website is calling it out. This isn't some users opinion.

If you want to believe otherwise feel free. I think it should be obvious to anyone though.

Click to expand...

It is some users opinion. Just because he typed up a document, saved it as a PDF for a company that does testing, it should automatically be trusted because their testing is reliable. They offer no proof of what they are saying, its some random PDF document with no sources or anything.

AV-C, AV-test, Top Ten, Matousec, MRG, etc... All the same to me, since i don't know what "businesss" they do behind their curtains, i will never trust their results, just take them as informative one-time snapshot of the tested product capacities.

those testers can only give hints which product actually is preferable.
Symantec/Kasprsky/Eset/aso was told to have best results in some magz
cause they pay advertisement there. but comodo again in its perfect manner.
i dont know how much they improved in the last years - but those issues
here drop them down - not the first time. sword of Damocles.

AV-C, AV-test, Top Ten, Matousec, MRG, etc... All the same to me, since i don't know what "businesss" they do behind their curtains, i will never trust their results, just take them as informative one-time snapshot of the tested product capacities.

Make it a point to read the EULA in detail of every piece of software you use. More so if you like using freeware. Nothing in the PC world is "free." Yor're paying for that freeware in loss of privacy in ways you never imagined. BTW -paid software is not better. That to me is the ultimate consumer insult.

Here's a gem from the EULA for Privatefirewall:

3.3. Privacyware has the right to gather information regarding the use of the Software. By installing the Software, you grant Privacyware permission to collect this information. Privacyware may use this information solely to improve its products or to track geographical data and the enforcement of this Agreement and will not disclose this information in a form that could personally identify you to any third party.

I have no convictions on one side or the other side (yet) because the responses that I've seen from both
parties during the Online Armor takeover, were too vague, but the accusations on the boards were flying.
I'd like to see exactly what money Matousec claims Tallemu/Emsisoft owed. Was it to re-test the product(s)
after their products had to be changed ?

Those are the only times I see people have to understandably pay Matousec for their additional time and labor.
And if a company is so proactive that theyre constantly changing their firewall, it would make sense to get
continual retestings published (unless they didnt do well, in that event they could opt out of even having their
results published)

What I noticed is that all this happened when Emsisoft took over and wanted to incorporate their product into
Online Armor. I do like Online Armor, especially it's feature to block entire countries with 1 click, but I did end
up blocking Germany because even OA called home from time to time when I had no options for lookups or
updates selected.

I purchased their Suite recently and had to uninstall the malware portion because it was giving me alot of
problems and slow FPS testing in GTA IV, (which is now completely broken for me) The same went for
Comodo. With comodo I was actually getting total system crashes and had to uninstall it as well.
why doesn't Emsisoft clear all this confusion up and just download the test and show everyone what the results
are themselves on the OA of today ?

Although the new 64 bit challenge, it looks like no one is doing well except Comodo. As far as them paying for
the position, that can be done if they keep retesting and improving their product according to the results.

Things arent adding up (yet) as far as I'm concerned, but demonizing one party or the other makes it all look
even more unbelievable.